Request for advice on license drafting
alvin at Mail.Linux-Consulting.com
Tue Feb 8 04:40:40 UTC 2005
hi ya chris
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, chris yoo wrote:
> > nothing to disagree ?? ( i think its 2 different animals )
> I disagree that there is nothing to disagree :)
> I actually mean that I disagree that OSD 7 requires you to
> redistribute software under the same license, the logic being that if
> it did then bsd-style license would not be open source certified.
i think bsd style license is well accepted in courts by now ..
too many company's based their business on it and now
are super big bsd-zillas
"open source" licenses doesn't necessarily need to be "certified"
to be valid, useful, recognized in courts where it matters
or did i miss something about certification, that the certifying
entity will also come to bat for us, when the legality of the
"open source license" is in the court in the jurisdiction we find
ourself arguing with the "thief"
having a certifying entity is good in that, its been looked
over with a fine tooth comb
> > i keep wondering .. why don't people talk to a GPL-competent lawyer
> > and have them draw up the license ...
> Open source competent lawyers are hard to come by and often require
> much $$$$. That having been said, I do plan to have my proposed
> license checked by a layer. I would just like to do as much of the
> work possible prior to doing so in order to minimise the financial
i've always seen, the lawyer pulls out their preferred verbage
on their contracts, licenses, etc .. and add your items to their forms
vs the 10x more expensive way of them signing off on your version
that they've seen for the first time
i equate sw folks writing/creating legal and binding licenses is
the same as lawyers writing/created software .. though there are
few that can do both equally well and add other licensed professions
to the pot too :-)
- the resulting code was always entertaining :-)
More information about the License-discuss